Social Security debate reignites
Social Security is surging to the forefront of the political debate ahead of the race for the White House in 2016.
The entitlement program has been thrust into the spotlight by a fight over the Social Security disability fund, which is expected to run dry by the end of next year.
The looming shortfall is stirring a burst of activism on the left, with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a likely 2016 candidate, and liberal hero Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) warning of an assault on the program from Republicans in Congress.
"Weve known for years that Social Security Disability Insurance is set to run low in 2016, and most people assumed that another bipartisan reallocation was coming," Warren wrote Wednesday in an email to supporters. "But now, thanks to the Republican ideological war on our most important national safety net, disabled Americans could suddenly face a 20 percent cut in their Social Security checks next year."
Read the rest at: http://thehill.com/policy/finance/232822-social-security-debate-reignites
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Him to go on SSDI. I told him he had better start writing to his RW TP buddies in Congress to get them to do some funding. It's funny when Romney can jump up and complain about the 47% but when it starts knocking at your door it isn't funny any more.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)It's alright to downplay the 47% if you aren't part of the 47%. BTW, he is a part of the 47% also. They vote against themselves.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)noses.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)these are the people least able to fight back: easy political targets.
newthinking
(3,982 posts)We keep trying to convince these guys. What they really need to be is shamed.
In my years I have seen that conservatives are always the first to use social programs but are always jealous when they benefit others.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)liberals and conservatives ...
Liberal, generally, recognize that bad stuff happens to undeserving people. And as such, liberals want, and are willing to pay for (in the form of taxes), robust social safety net programming, on the off chance that they might need it.
Whereas, conservatives hold the belief that fortune/misfortune is earned through our choices. And as such, resist having to pay for the bad choices of others .... except when misfortune befalls them, or those they feel responsible for, e.g., minor children, parents; then, they are convinced that they have earned the benefits that they would deny others, all while resisting paying for the benefits, even as they are accessing them.
redruddyred
(1,615 posts)on how the democrats could better deliver their message.
maybe this needs to be part of it.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)"They better get 2/3 votes because I will veto any proposed cuts to benefits to our neediest Americans"
Response to PoliticAverse (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed